Public hearing begins on death penalty overhaul

News-Times, The (Danbury, CT)

Published 7:00 pm, Monday, January 31, 2005

That's because her son's killer, Richard Reynolds, is awaiting execution on death row.

"A child can see what's wrong with the state, why can't adults," said Williams, of Wolcott. "Let's put murderers who are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt away. Why even have a jury system at all, or have police risking their lives to catch criminals, if we're not going to enforce the law?"

The committee held the first public hearing on the death penalty for this session against the backdrop of continued postponements last week in the execution of Michael Ross, who killed eight women in the early 1980s.

Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-West Haven, the co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said the Ross case is a shining example of why the death penalty just isn't working in Connecticut.

"He has wanted to die for the last 10 years," Lawlor said. "If ever there is an ideal candidate for death row, it's Michael Ross. What do we do with a person we have to drag kicking and screaming? If we can't execute this guy, how can we execute anyone in the state?"

Many lawmakers, even those in favor of capital punishment in Connecticut, said the system clearly has problems.

Sen. David Cappiello, R-Danbury, supports the death penalty, but said the circumstances of the last week demonstrate a flaw in the state's system of administering the punishment.

"If we are going to have a death penalty, we have to do something about these endless appeals, not just on behalf of the defendant, but on behalf of these independent groups," Cappiello said. "Ross hired his own counsel and the public defenders stayed on the case."

In a wild twist of events over the last week, Ross' execution was postponed four times. That's despite the killer's desire to drop further appeals and two U.S. Supreme Court decisions that cleared legal hurdles to the execution. Additional questions arose just hours before the scheduled execution early Saturday morning.

"No one can maintain that existing laws are playing out in a rational way," said Sen. Andrew Roraback, an opponent of the death penalty and a Goshen Republican whose district includes Brookfield and New Milford. "This is clearly - in my opinion - a dysfunctional system. I honestly don't see anything the legislature can do to make the system functional. As long as there is a death penalty, there will be endless appeals."

Lawrence Adams of Boston has become an anti-death penalty activist and told legislators mistakes can be made.

Adams knows. He was convicted of murder in 1974 and was on death row and later in prison until new DNA evidence exonerated him. During his sentence, Massachusetts abolished the death penalty.

"I spent 32 years before I was exonerated, and probably the state abolition of the death penalty saved my life," Adams said. "Because the death penalty is so irreversible, it should not be applied unless we have due process 100 percent. We can't get that now. The best we can do is 99.999 to infinity."

Most of the people who spoke at the hearing were activists and clergy opposed to the death penalty, but opinion polls in Connecticut show about 60 percent support the death penalty, while about 80 percent support the Ross execution.

The legislature is considering two bills. One would abolish the death penalty. The other would require an automatic life sentence if the jury did not agree the first time on a death sentence.

Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, the co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said at the beginning of the hearing, "This is not a hearing about Michael Ross. It is about making modifications to the death penalty in Connecticut."

Cappiello disagreed. "This is about Michael Ross and others like him."

Indeed, whatever the legislature decides could determine whether Ross lives or dies, regardless of where the judicial process goes from here.

Still, Rep. Robert Godfrey, D-Danbury, a supporter of the death penalty, said the recent events haven't changed anyone's mind.

"I have yet to meet a colleague that has changed their position because of this," Godfrey said.

"The death penalty is Connecticut is an unworkable and tortured process that can't be fixed," Smyth said. "The system is broken and if you want to fix it, you have got to abolish the death penalty."

Smyth said the death penalty is enforced unequally, because six of the eight on death row were sentenced in Waterbury. In addition, of the 33 cases where a defendant was convicted of multiple murders at one time, only two were sentenced to death, and juries, judges and prosecutors vary from one area to another.

John Connelly, state's attorney in the Waterbury judicial district, said he has not asked for more death penalty cases than other prosecutors. He has just worked with police, and his office does not plea bargain with criminals who commit heinous crimes.

Connelly became emotional when he recalled several cases he prosecuted.

"I will never plea bargain cases with people who murdered police officers. I will not plea bargain with a case about a brutal stabbing of a pregnant woman," he said.

He continued, "What is the just punishment for crimes committed, when a man slaughtered and butchered his wife? What do we as a society feel is appropriate for a man who took his 2-year-old and smashed her head against a shower because she wasn't potty trained?"

Cappiello said he wants to know what the alternative to the death penalty would be if it is eliminated. Though the legislation calls for life in prison without the possibility of release, he said the type of prison and the type of conditions should be defined.

Further, Cappiello worries what would happen if the death penalty is abolished.

"Once you remove that barrier, I truly believe that some will want to remove the next barrier of solitary confinement," he said. "And then, say even if someone did commit eight rapes and eight murders, there will be attempts to remove other barriers and let them out into society."